Lorenzmeier / Sancin Contemporary Issues of Human Rights Protection in International and National Settings

1. Auflage 2018
ISBN: 978-3-8452-6228-4
Verlag: Nomos
Format: PDF
Kopierschutz: Adobe DRM (»Systemvoraussetzungen)

E-Book, Englisch, 315 Seiten, Format (B × H): 153 mm x 227 mm

The contributors of the volume analyse the effect of the ECHR and international human rights on the national and European legal order from different angles. Special emphasis is given on the Union’s accession to the ECHR and the scrutiny of ECJ’s opinion 2/13. The impact of the human rights provisions of the accession agreement with Ukraine is shown besides some more general issues of human rights protection in national jurisdictions, namely Germany, Poland, Slovenia and Turkey for providing a comparative overview of the various challenges countries with different backgrounds face in the implementation of human rights, including social human rights. All authors are academics working in the field of human right protection and the aim is to provide the reader with a better understanding of the challenges of international human rights protection. The book is useful for academics and students in the field of international and European law and international politics.

Autoren/Hrsg.

Lorenzmeier, Stefan

Sancin, Vasilka

Fachgebiete

• Sozialwissenschaften Politikwissenschaft Politische Kultur Menschenrechte, Bürgerrechte
• Rechtswissenschaften Internationales Recht und Europarecht Internationales Recht Internationale Menschen- und Minderheitenrechte, Kinderrechte
• Rechtswissenschaften Internationales Recht und Europarecht Europarecht Europäisches Öffentliches Recht (inkl. EMRK)

Inhaltsverzeichnis

1;Cover;1
2; Introduction to Contemporary Issues of Human Rights in International, European and National Settings;10
2.1; I. The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;10
2.1.1; 1. The ECHR and National Law;11
2.1.1.1; a. Norway, Poland and Slovenia;11
2.1.1.2; b. Germany;12
2.1.2; 2. The European Union and the ECHR – a never-ending story?;14
2.1.2.1; a. De lege lata status of the ECHR in the EU legal order;14
2.1.2.2; b. De lege ferenda – Accession to the ECHR;14
2.2; III. Protection of Human Rights by the EU – Internally and Externally;16
2.3; IV. International Human Rights in a Broader Context;18
2.3.1; 1. International Sports Organizations and Human Rights;18
2.3.2; 2. Social Human Rights;18
2.3.2.1; a. A Driver for Self-Determination?;20
2.3.2.2; b. Social Rights and Global Constitutionalism;21
2.3.2.3; c. Enforcement of Social Human Rights;21
2.3.3; 3. International Criminal Law;22
2.4; V. Concluding Remarks;23
3; A. Human Rights and National Legal Orders;24
3.1; The Role of the European Convention on Human Rights in the Norwegian Legal Order;26
3.1.1; Abstract;26
3.1.2; 1 Introduction;26
3.1.3; 2 The Formal Protection;27
3.1.3.1; 2.1 The Convention as International Law and as Domestic Law;27
3.1.3.2; 2.2 The Legal Status of the Convention before 1999;28
3.1.3.3; 2.3 The Human Rights Act;29
3.1.3.4; 2.4 The Protection of Human Rights in the Norwegian Constitution;30
3.1.4; 3 Interpreting the ECHR within the Domestic Legal Order;32
3.1.5; 4 The Actual Role Played by the ECHR – An Overview of Case Law Material;34
3.1.5.1; 4.1 Invoking the ECHR before the Domestic Courts;34
3.1.5.2; 4.2 Judgments by the European Court of Human Rights against Norway;35
3.1.6; 5 Interpreting Human Rights after the Constitutional Reforms in 2014;40
3.1.7; 6 Concluding Comments;42
3.2; The Role of the ECtHR in the Polish Legal Order;44
3.2.1; Abstract;44
3.2.2; I. Introduction;44
3.2.3; II. Impact of the ECtHR’s Judgments on Polish Constitutional Law and Judicial Interpretation of Polish Law;46
3.2.4; III. Measures Taken by Poland;47
3.2.4.1; A. Criminal Procedure;48
3.2.4.2; B. Post-Communism Issues;57
3.2.5; IV. Issues Raised by the ECtHR;60
3.2.5.1; A. Right to Marry;61
3.2.5.2; B. Exceptions to the Prohibition of Abortion;63
3.2.6; V. Conclusions;68
3.3; International Human Rights in the Case Law of the Slovenian Constitutional Court;70
3.3.1; Abstract;70
3.3.2; I. Introduction;70
3.3.3; II. The Position of International Human Rights in the Slovenian Constitution;72
3.3.3.1; 1. Civil and Political Rights;72
3.3.3.2; 2. Economic, Social and Cultural Rights;75
3.3.3.3; 3. Special Provisions;80
3.3.4; III. International Human Rights in the Case Law of the Constitutional Court;83
3.3.4.1; 1. The Position of International Law in the Slovenian Constitution;83
3.3.4.2; 2. The Jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court;85
3.3.4.2.1; i. The Jurisdiction to Review Laws and Other Regulations;85
3.3.4.2.2; ii. The Jurisdiction to Decide on Constitutional Complaints;86
3.3.4.2.3; iii. The Jurisdiction to Review Treaties;86
3.3.4.3; 3. Some Relevant Case Law of the Constitutional Court;87
3.3.4.3.1; i. Direct Application of the ECHR;87
3.3.4.3.2; ii. The Right of the Defendant to Use His Language and Script;88
3.3.4.3.3; iii. The Rights of the Blind Plaintiff in Civil Proceedings;89
3.3.4.3.4; iv. The Review of the International Protection Act;90
3.3.5; IV. Conclusion;91
3.4; International Human Rights and their Enforcement in the German Legal Order;92
3.4.1; Abstract;92
3.4.2; I. Introduction;92
3.4.3; II. Status and Adoption of Human Rights in Germany;94
3.4.3.1; 1. Status and Adoption of Human Rights Treaties;95
3.4.3.1.1; a. Transformation Theory;95
3.4.3.1.2; b. Enforcement Theory;96
3.4.3.1.3; c. Art. 59 (2) Under Those Theories;96
3.4.3.1.4; d. Status of Human Rights Treaties;97
3.4.3.2; 2. Status and Adoption of Customary Human Rights;97
3.4.3.3; 3. Interpretation of German Law in Conformity with International Human Rights;98
3.4.4; III. Enforcement of Human Rights Treaties in the German Legal Order;98
3.4.4.1; 1. International Remedies;98
3.4.4.2; 2. Enforcement by German Courts;99
3.4.5; IV. Human Rights Treaties before German Courts;101
3.4.5.1; 1. Universal Human Rights Treaties before German Courts;101
3.4.5.1.1; a. Non-Examination of Human Rights Treaties;101
3.4.5.1.2; b. No Violation of Human Rights Treaties;102
3.4.5.1.3; c. Human Rights Treaties Not Directly Applicable;102
3.4.5.1.4; d. Indirect Application of Human Rights Treaties;104
3.4.5.1.5; e. Direct Application of Human Rights Treaties;105
3.4.5.2; 2. ECHR before German Courts;106
3.4.6; V. Difference between Universal Human Rights Treaties and the ECHR;107
3.4.7; VI. Conclusion;108
4; B. Human Rights and European Law;110
4.1; Federalism of Fundamental Rights Protection in Germany and the EU – Two Are Better Than One?;112
4.1.1; Abstract;112
4.1.2; I. Introduction;112
4.1.3; II. Fundamental Rights Federalism;115
4.1.4; III. German Fundamental Rights Federalism;116
4.1.4.1; 1. Rules for Conflict of Laws;116
4.1.4.2; 2. Consequences for the Relationship between Federal Fundamental Rights Protection and Fundamental Rights Protection by the German Länder;117
4.1.5; IV. EU Fundamental Rights Federalism;122
4.1.5.1; 1. Rules for Conflict of Laws – The status quo;123
4.1.5.2; 2. Consequences of the status quo of Rules for Conflict of Laws for the Relationship between National and EU Fundamental Rights Protection;125
4.1.6; V. The Future of Fundamental Rights Federalism within the EU and its Member States;127
4.2; The Future of the Bosphorus-Presumption after the EU’s Accession to the European Convention on Human Rights;132
4.2.1; Abstract;132
4.2.2; I. Introduction;132
4.2.3; II. The Bosphorus-Presumption;134
4.2.3.1; A. The Development of the Equivalent Protection Formula in Bosphorus;134
4.2.3.2; B. The Formula’s Extension beyond the Bosphorus Scenario;136
4.2.4; III. The Future of the Presumption after the EU’s Accession to the Convention;140
4.2.4.1; A. Extension to the EU;140
4.2.4.1.1; 1. Rationale of the Bosphorus-Presumption;141
4.2.4.1.2; 2. Equality of the High Contracting Parties;142
4.2.4.1.3; 3. Purpose of Accession;145
4.2.4.2; C. Continuance for EU Member States;146
4.2.5; IV. A Better Solution: The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine;149
4.2.6; V. Summary;151
4.3; The Co-Respondent Mechanism before the European Court of Human Rights: An Adequate Procedural Solution or a Flawed Mechanism?;152
4.3.1; Abstract;152
4.3.1.1; 1. Introduction;153
4.3.1.2; 2. Developments in the Accession Process;154
4.3.1.3; 3. The Practice Pre-Accession;156
4.3.1.3.1; 3.1 Procedural Alternatives;157
4.3.1.3.2; 3.2 Third Party Intervention;158
4.3.1.3.3; 3.3 More than One Respondent;160
4.3.1.4; 4. Guiding Principles in Drafting the Co-Respondent Mechanism;160
4.3.1.4.1; 4.1 Gaps in Participation, Accountability, and Enforceability;161
4.3.1.4.2; 4.2 Autonomy of the EU’s Legal Order;162
4.3.1.4.3; 4.3 Other;164
4.3.1.5; 5. The Co-Respondent Mechanism in the Draft Accession Agreement;164
4.3.1.5.1; 5.1 When Should the Mechanism Apply?;166
4.3.1.5.1.1; 5.1.1 EU as a Co-Respondent;166
4.3.1.5.1.2; 5.1.2 EU Member State(s) as a Co-Respondent;167
4.3.1.5.2; 5.2 Triggering the Mechanism;168
4.3.1.5.2.1; 5.2.1 Change of Status;169
4.3.1.5.3; 5.3 Joint Responsibility;170
4.3.1.5.4; 5.4 Internal Rules as a Next Step;171
4.3.1.6; 6. The Co-Respondent’s Mechanism’s Weaknesses;172
4.3.1.6.1; 6.1 Voluntary Nature;172
4.3.1.6.2; 6.2 Preservation of the EU’s Autonomy;174
4.3.1.6.3; 6.3 Effective Protection of Human Rights;176
4.3.1.7; 7. Conclusion;177
4.4; The Accession of the European Union to the ECHR and the Inter-State Application under Article 33 ECHR;178
4.4.1; Abstract;178
4.4.2; I. Introduction;178
4.4.3; II. The Inter-State Application under Article 33 ECHR;179
4.4.4; III. Two Constellations Distinguished;181
4.4.4.1; 1. Constellation 1: The EU as Possible Party in Inter-Party Proceedings under Article 33 ECHR;182
4.4.4.1.1; a. The Charter of Fundamental Rights: a Yardstick, but no Competence for the EU;182
4.4.4.1.2; b. Article 2 TEU: A Value Platform, but no Competence;183
4.4.4.1.3; c. Result: No Room for the EU as Applicant in Proceedings under Article 33 ECHR;184
4.4.4.2; 2. Constellation 2: inter-State Applications between EU Member States;185
4.4.4.2.1; a. The Autonomy of the EU Legal Order threatened by the Inter-State application: Taking Stock;185
4.4.4.2.2; b. The CEJU’s Proposition ‘ratione materiae’: A Chilling Effect for the Inter-State Application;186
4.4.4.2.3; c. Mechanisms in EU Law to Address Human Rights Issues;187
4.4.4.2.3.1; aa) The Treaty Infringement Proceedings of Articles 258 and 259 TFEU;187
4.4.4.2.3.2; Article 7 TEU – Prevention and Sanction Mechanism;189
4.4.4.2.4; d. Result: Inter-State Application’s Functions outweigh Interest in Preservation of Autonomy under Article 344 TFEU;190
4.4.5; IV. Conclusion: More, not less Human Rights Protection after the Accession;190
4.5; The Procedural and Substantial Requirements of the European Union’s Accession to the European Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;192
4.5.1; Abstract;192
4.5.1.1; I. Introduction;192
4.5.1.2; II. The Accession Procedure;194
4.5.1.2.1; 1. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations or between International Organizations;194
4.5.1.2.2; 2. General Accession Requirements, Art. 218 TFEU;195
4.5.1.2.3; 3. Provisions Concerning the Decisions in the EU Council and the European Parliament;197
4.5.1.2.3.1; a. Consent of the European Parliament;197
4.5.1.2.3.2; b. Decision of the EU Council;198
4.5.1.2.4; 4. Approval of the Member States;199
4.5.1.2.5; 5. Treaty Revision?;200
4.5.1.2.5.1; a. Constitutional Shift?;200
4.5.1.2.5.2; b. Systematic Interpretation, Art. 311 (3) TFEU;201
4.5.1.2.5.3; c. View of Advocate General Kokott;203
4.5.1.2.5.4; d. Applicable for later Protocols to the ECHR?;203
4.5.1.2.6; 6. Special Status for the Council Decision?;204
4.5.1.2.7; 7. Interim Conclusion;205
4.5.1.3; III. The Substantive Law Governing Accession;206
4.5.1.3.1; 1. “Shall Accede”, Art. 6 (2) (1) TEU;207
4.5.1.3.2; 2. “Shall not affect the Union’s competences”, Art. 6 (2) 2nd sent. TEU;207
4.5.1.3.3; 3. Competence of the ECJ to challenge envisaged Agreements, Art. 218 (11) TFEU;210
4.5.1.4; IV. Does the accession affect the national legal orders of the Member States?;211
4.5.1.5; V. Concluding Remarks;212
4.6; Human Rights in Association Agreements with Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia;214
4.6.1; Abstract;214
4.6.2; I. Introduction;214
4.6.3; II. Background of the EU’s relations with Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia: From Partnership and Cooperation to Association;216
4.6.4; III. Legal Basis and Objectives;223
4.6.4.1; 1. Enhanced Human Rights Conditionality in the AAs;224
4.6.4.2; 2. Common Values Conditionality;224
4.6.4.3; 3. Mechanisms of Legislative Approximation in Field of Human Rights;225
4.6.4.4; 4. New Generation of Legislative Approximation Clauses;226
4.6.4.5; 5. Procedures to Amend or Update the Incorporated EU acquis;228
4.6.4.6; 6. Scenarios of Potential Legislative Approximation in the Field of Human Rights;229
4.6.5; IV. Concluding Remarks;231
5; C. Human Rights Protection and International Law;234
5.1; Global Constitutionalism and Social Rights : A Few Notes on Human Rights in the Quest for a Substantive Rule of Law;236
5.1.1; Abstract;236
5.1.2; I. The Role of Social Rights in the Context of Human Rights;236
5.1.3; II. Social Rights and Global Constitutionalism;243
5.1.4; III. Substantive Legitimacy and Social Rights;247
5.2; Right to Development: Driver for Extraterritorial Application of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights;252
5.2.1; Abstract;252
5.2.1.1; I. Introduction;252
5.2.1.2; II. Core Norm of the Right to Development;254
5.2.1.3; III. Internal and External Dimension of the Right to Development;257
5.2.1.4; IV. Extraterritorial Obligations of States to Ensure Realization of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights;258
5.2.1.5; V. Conclusion;264
5.3; The Role of the Olympic Movement in the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights;266
5.3.1; Abstract;266
5.3.1.1; 1. Introduction;266
5.3.1.2; 2. The Olympic Movement;268
5.3.1.2.1; 2.1. Subjects of the Olympic Movement;268
5.3.1.2.2; 2.2. The IOC;269
5.3.1.2.3; 2.3. The Olympic Charter;272
5.3.1.3; 3. The Olympic Movement as an Instrument for Promoting Democratisation and Domestic Protection of Human Rights;274
5.3.1.3.1; 3.1. Sanctioning;275
5.3.1.3.2; 3.2. Shaming;282
5.3.1.3.3; 3.3. Cooptation;283
5.3.1.4; 4. Conclusion;285
5.4; A Defendant's Right to a Fair Trial and Improvement of the Victim’s Status in the Proceedings before International Criminal Jurisdictions;288
5.4.1; Abstract;288
5.4.1.1; I. International Criminal Procedure as sui generis Mixed Procedure;288
5.4.1.2; II. Defendant and Human Rights Standards in the International Criminal Proceedings;291
5.4.1.2.1; 1. Presumption of Innocence;292
5.4.1.2.2; 2. Independence and Impartiality of the Court;293
5.4.1.2.3; 3. Fair, Public and Expeditious trial;293
5.4.1.2.3.1; a. Fair Trial;293
5.4.1.2.3.2; b. Public Trial;294
5.4.1.2.3.3; c. Expeditious Trial;294
5.4.1.2.4; 4. Equality of Arms;295
5.4.1.3; III. The Role and Status of Victims;295
5.4.1.4; IV. Balance of the Competing Interests;299
5.4.1.4.1; 1. Rights in Conflict: ad hoc Tribunal's Experience;299
5.4.1.4.1.1; a. The Use of Protective Measures: Anonymity;301
5.4.1.4.1.2; b. The Use of Protective Measures: Exclusion of the Public;302
5.4.1.4.2; 2. Rights in Conflict: Victim's Participation at the ICC and Defendant's Rights;304
5.4.1.4.2.1; a. Victim Participation and the Right to an Expeditious Trial;304
5.4.1.4.2.2; b. Undermining the Presumption of Innocence;305
5.4.1.4.2.3; c. The Right to a Fair Trial and Equality of Arms;305
5.4.1.5; V. Conclusion;306
6; List of Contributors;308
7; Index;312